![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 |
Since this is such a minor comment, I recommend that it be removed once my question has been answered.
What is a 'waste tip'? What is a 'tip' in general? Something containing enough water to kill people, and perhaps someing to do with coal mining?
Is there a different term for this in American English? -- Jimbo Wales
Much as I appreciate the sentiment of putting the lyrics here, it's a fairly clear copyvio. The Wednesday Island ( talk) 14:22, 29 November 2007 (UTC) l —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.26.230.58 ( talk) 17:50, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
Anyone object to merging Pantglas Junior School into this article? I think most people know the name Aberfan, rather than the name of the school. Carcharoth 16:50, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
Why is this categorized as a corporate scandal? The NCB was a state institution at the time was it not? Or is there no such thing as "nationalised industry scandal" in the author's mind?
What was the justification for these deletions? I propose to revert soon unless somebody explains them. PatGallacher 12:00, 2005 May 25 (UTC)
The pupils of Pantglas Junior School had arrived only minutes earlier for the last day of term. They had just left the assembly hall, where they had been singing "All Things Bright and Beautiful", when a great noise was heard outside. Had they left for their classrooms a few minutes later, the loss of life would have been significantly reduced, as the classrooms were on the side of the building nearest the landslide.
This paragraph doesn't make sense. Shouldn't it be rewritten as it confuses readers on how many minutes and where the children where at the time. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.151.19.72 ( talk) 19:52, 14 May 2009 (UTC)
The page 'Aberfan' should be about the village while a page with a title such as 'Aberfan mining disaster' should be used for the disaster. This page has no information about the village history and the village today. Mtaylor848 ( talk) 14:40, 16 August 2009 (UTC)
(Outdent) As most of the page is on the disaster it is probably best, from an attribution point of view, to move this page so that the history remains intact. Though we would loose history on the redirect from the merge in 2004. The village article can then be started as a new article. Keith D ( talk) 23:22, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
The sooner the better, as far as I'm concerned. BTW it was 15,600 hits (I have a keyboard with a mind of its own - lame excuse for a typo I know, but it's the best I can do). I concur with the name being changed to simply "Aberfan Disaster". The date is unnecessary - it may imply that there were others (god forbid). Rambler24 ( talk) 09:26, 29 September 2009 (UTC)
Looks like clear consensus. Anyone gonna do it? Folks at 137 ( talk) 23:15, 23 November 2009 (UTC)
I've made a couple of mistakes in performing this requested move, my apologies for the dog's breakfast of an edit history that resulted; my understanding is that you all wanted the page to be at Aberfan disaster and that is where it now is, along with its associated talk page. Currently Aberfan redirects there, but this can certainly be changed to be a stub about the village if that's what's wanted. I noted that Jimbo himself requested that the talk page material formerly at Aberfan disaster be deleted, and I've done that, which made things a lot easier in getting this talk page into place. If there is anything that I have bollixed up by misunderstanding what was wanted, please accept my apologies; feel free to leave me a note and I'll be glad to fix it. Accounting4Taste: talk 01:50, 7 December 2009 (UTC)
My aim on Wikipedia is to preserve as much page history as possible. I found both the article and talk page of Aberfan disaster in the deleted edits of Conversion script. Without reading any of the discussion above, I decided to rectify this problem by moving the old history at Aberfan disaster to Talk:Aberfan disaster/Old history and moving the old talk page to Talk:Aberfan disaster/Archive 1. I don't believe that any talk page comments should be removed unless they're personal attacks, even at the request of the author, even if the author is Jimbo Wales. When Jimbo Wales wrote that comment in 2001, archiving of talk pages was almost unheard of, and things have changed a lot since then. He made a constructive comment which I think should be part of the historical record. Graham 87 18:17, 10 January 2010 (UTC)
{{ geodata-check}} The coordinates need the following fixes:
The correct coordinates for the Aberfan Disaster are as follows:
51°41'41.07"N 3°20'50.56"W
This can be verified on Google Earth, where these cordinates correspond to the disaster memorial site. 24.78.207.64 ( talk) 00:18, 26 January 2010 (UTC)
I don't see any reason for it to be there, or if it remains, it should be re-written. As it is, it seems like it endorses the idea that precognition exists. It should at least be re-written to say there were claims about precognition in connection with it, not "apparent predictions" which is a silly, and non-neutral term. And anyway, if they lived in a town overshadowed by a huge pile of rock, why wouldn't people tend to dream about it falling? Less precognition than common sense.
I think it makes the article and Wikipedia less credible for this even to be on the page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.2.218.145 ( talk) 04:38, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
I just deleted the precognition section. whok ( talk) 05:51, 16 April 2010 (UTC)
You mention "Aberfan: Under the Arc Lights," in The Spectator, October 10, 1966. If that date is correct, it was several days before the disaster, unrelated to it, and therefore suitable for the Wiki page on Aberfan as a village, not the disaster itself. 109.157.20.13 ( talk) 19:14, 15 December 2012 (UTC)
What? Is it a song, a book, or a chewing gum flavour? How about saying "uncle" instead of mother-brother? Do people even read what they type? Derekbd ( talk) 05:12, 16 May 2011 (UTC)
ツ Stacey ( talk) 15:43, 26 December 2015 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Aberfan disaster. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 17:15, 2 October 2016 (UTC)
Is it worthwhile/useful to start a new section specifically covering the activities around the 50th anniversary? Not only is there a number of documentaries/dramas, there are appraisals of the press and government roles, various concerts, a major new choral work, and also, perhaps most importantly, the narratives of survivors that have only recently be able to tell their stories.
There is a list of twelve ways the arts are commemorating the disaster here which has useful pointers to many of the TV programmes and also some exhibitions. Robevans123 ( talk) 12:24, 19 October 2016 (UTC)
The reports about the weight and volume of material that were involved contradict. 40,000 cubic metres of material, weighing around half a million tonnes... Hmm.. the density of Colliery shale is approximately 1.7 tonnes per cubic metre. This means, that if the volumes are correct, that the weight of the material to arrive in the village was 70,000 tonnes and not the 'half a million tonnes' quoted by the South Wales Police site. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jgb2 ( talk • contribs) 15:14, 9 January 2009 (UTC)
Dunks ( talk) 01:07, 10 January 2009 (UTC)
Where is the info about the studies on how they dealt with the disaster without murdering any of the perpetrators? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.234.123.137 ( talk) 08:06, 27 August 2011 (UTC)
What studies? The people around there dealt with their grief with the quiet dignity that was their normal response to mining disasters, however caused. If you can find any such studies by all means quote them. And sign your posts (add 4 x ~ at the end). Britmax ( talk) 08:24, 27 August 2011 (UTC)
It may be stating the blooming obvious but the Welsh people suffered the loss in a dignified silence. Reason - you get on with life and don't wear your heart on your sleeve. It is actually an old fashioned British thing - we suffer in silence, we grit our teeth and carry on and don't see the need to tell the world how we suffer. Coal miners and their families, and the communities they lived in looked after each other in both the good times and the bad, but especially in times of pain; and we did so behind closed doors. Apart from which what would a riot achieve? It could not or would not bring back one life and was, is and always will be pointless. Why smash up where we lived? There was no huggy-feely counselling, we got on with our shocked painful lives. The funerals followed the tragedy and that was when the public face of our grief was shown; our private grief continued in private and is still today borne with dignity. I was 16 when the disaster happened and have over the years had to deal with my own personal demons but I still feel the pain that day brought to my life. Anger that it happened but riot - it never even entered our heads! It would have been disrespectful to those who died and those who grieved had such a thing as "Self respect." The Geologist ( talk) 13:58, 20 March 2015 (UTC)
I have to disagree about the dignified silence stuff actually, 116 children & 28 adults died in a horrible way and those responsible should have faced a much higher punishment than they did. There was knowledge beforehand about the instability of the location and yet they went ahead with it. There was ongoing knowledge while the coal installation was present and no safety precautions or actions were taken. Not one person was jailed. I know it's pointless going on about it, and I know this isn't the place for such discussion, but I just felt like adding my opinion anyway, sorry. -- AF1990 ( talk) 03:15, 12 October 2016 (UTC)
I am doubtful abut the phrase: "[...] were deposited on the side of Mynydd Merthyr, an overhanging ridge, directly above the village of Aberfan.". This can be read as meaning an Overhang (rock formation), but this type of formation is not typical of the area. The picture shown above ( File:Aberfan and old coal tips - geograph.org.uk - 673825.jpg) shows the lie of the land. It is possible that an overhang was covered up by the slip, but I think overhanging ridge just means a ridge directly above the village. It is ambiguous, so I will delete "overhanging". Verbcatcher ( talk) 03:14, 23 October 2016 (UTC)
I recall reading that in newspaper microfilm, and this added to rumors that the Beatles were splitting up. You may notice this comes not long after the Beatles had stopped touring. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.63.16.82 ( talk) 14:21, 3 April 2012 (UTC)
If I go on further about this regarding the Beatles, I'll be off-topic regarding the Aberfan disaster. There is a Wikipedia entry about the Beatles in 1966, so I will copy the above remark (about declining to do Aberfan benefit) to talk page there. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.63.16.82 ( talk) 16:12, 5 April 2012 (UTC)
From Hunter Davies' biography of The Beatles (1978 edition), p. 362, quoting Ringo: "Most of the people running charities are not nice people. What good did the Aberfan Fund do, except for all the lawyers ? They gave each person £5,000 for losing a child. Ridiculous. Five million quid doesn't equal losing a child." The Beatles had given what was to be their last public concert in San Francisco in late August 1966, after a particularly gruelling tour of the Philippines, Japan and the US, so i'm guessing thye were not really up for going back on stage then. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.7.179.191 ( talk) 21:27, 23 October 2016 (UTC)
Detail of entry seems about right. Maybe trim it a bit when there's an article on it. Along with Sinfonia Cymru and David Childs. All on the todo list, but I may wait until the CD has been reviewed a bit more and USA premier has happened. Robevans123 ( talk) 22:48, 23 October 2016 (UTC)
The introduction states that "Rescue efforts were hampered by the large crowd who rushed into the village delaying the arrival of mines rescue workers from Merthyr Vale Colliery."
I have problems with the tone and meaning of this and I don't think it is really supported by any statements in the article. Some background:
Some thoughts arise:
See also the later section in the article on "Rescue efforts". Only the last sentence of the opening para is supported by a reference. The reference only supports some of the other statements. I am loath to put citation needed templates all over this article a day before it'll be read before many people, but I believe that at least the sentence under question in the introduction should be removed until/if it is supported by referenced text in the article. Robevans123 ( talk) 15:26, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
The phrase "if it had struck a few hours later, the school would have broken up for half-term." is very confusing to non-British readers (or maybe just to American readers like myself). Having had some exposure to British culture, I understand that the school "breaking up" means that the students and teachers left for a break from school, but to an average American reader this could easily be misinterpreted as the school building being physically broken (I.e. because of the disaster), which seems unrelated to the rest of the sentence.
I would edit it myself, but I'm not sure what half-term is, other than some break from school, and I don't know if the definition is relevant to the article. And I certainly don't want to diminish communication that the current wording provides to British readers that I'm sure I've missed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mghoffmann ( talk • contribs) 07:51, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Is there any reliable source for the joint funeral on 27 October being "attended by more than 2,000 people"? There are plenty of instances online, but most see to Wikipedia mirror sites or recent news articles which have probably used this article as their source. This contemporary source gives the fugure of mourners, as 12,000. This seems to be a rather large figure. Martinevans123 ( talk) 21:17, 23 October 2016 (UTC)
I was thinking about this earlier. The 2,000+ figure is everywhere, but they all look like mirror sites. There's a figure of 3,000 from the Merthyr Express - it's somewhere on the Nuffield Aberfan disaster site (but it doesn't give an issue date or number). I saw the itnsource - way too big I think, but it's pretty difficult to estimate crowds on hillsides, but from the footage I've seen 2,000 - 3,000 seems about right. I've seen a reference to 5,000 at http://www.uwp.co.uk/news/2016/10/aberfan, but the University of Wales Press website seems a bit slow at the moment & is timing out. I think it's from part of a book on the challenges of faith or something along those lines. Which remains me, we should have some information somewhere on the pastoral support given to the rescuers and bereaved. Some of the church ministers did amazing work (one of them carried on even though two of his children were dead), and the Salvation Army and Red Cross pitched in. I've read that the Sally Army provided 6 bottles of whisky or brandy every day to the Police and other staff working at Bethania. It was to add to hot drinks to keep them feeling warm rather than to numb the effects of their work.
The figure of 5,000 also crops up a few times in quotes from the Bishop of Llandaff, but it becomes clear that it's the current bishop's childhood memories, and I suspect he's read tho book mentioned above.
This British Pathe newsreel of the mass funeral mentions 10,000, which again seems rather high.
I think it's time for Martinevans123 to go to Newport library and check the South Wales Argus microfiches!
Images seem a bit scarce. I've added a reqphoto at Talk:Alfred Robens, Baron Robens of Woldingham. Martinevans123 ( talk) 22:07, 25 October 2016 (UTC) p.s. the final choice for his 1965 appearance on Desert Island Discs was " Climb Ev'ry Mountain".
I recently noticed some stills from ITV news film being used here in some material produced by the NLW. The stills are watermarked with a symbol, I think representing the National Screen and Sound Archive of Wales (www.archif.com). Although the document, apart from its title "ITV Stills", contains no mention of copyright, the NLW seems to have arrangements with BBC/ITV etc to digitise TV material concerning Wales. But it did get me thinking. Would we be allowed to use a handful of video stills from documentary/news footage from the time of the disaster under "fair use"?
Also found this cartoon of Robens, which may be a useful external link in the tribunal page. Robevans123 ( talk) 15:50, 30 October 2016 (UTC)
I suggest moving some of the detail from the Davies Inquiry section into a new article on the Aberfan Tribunal. We could expand the new article to cover its place in the history of similar enquiries, and give a list of the participants, several of whom later became prominent including: [1]
I don't want to expand this article to cover this as it would be overweight, and might be taken to suggest an equivalence between these distinguished lawyers and the sufferings of the bereaved and the heroism of the rescue attempts. Verbcatcher ( talk) 16:48, 24 October 2016 (UTC)
References
I am preparing a draft for Aberfan Disaster Tribunal. I'll put a link here when it's ready for review. Verbcatcher ( talk) 21:03, 28 October 2016 (UTC)
I am unhappy with the section title Consequences for NCB, staff, board and chairman. The first comma indicates that the section covers the consequences to the NCB as a corporate body as well as to its people. "Board" is tautologous because NCB is "National Coal Board". I suggest Consequences for NCB staff, board members and chairman or Consequences for NCB: staff, board members and chairman. Verbcatcher ( talk) 19:13, 30 October 2016 (UTC)
Please see Talk:Aberfan Disaster Tribunal#Sources for expanding the article. Some of this also applies here. Verbcatcher ( talk) 01:05, 31 October 2016 (UTC)
![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 |
Since this is such a minor comment, I recommend that it be removed once my question has been answered.
What is a 'waste tip'? What is a 'tip' in general? Something containing enough water to kill people, and perhaps someing to do with coal mining?
Is there a different term for this in American English? -- Jimbo Wales
Much as I appreciate the sentiment of putting the lyrics here, it's a fairly clear copyvio. The Wednesday Island ( talk) 14:22, 29 November 2007 (UTC) l —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.26.230.58 ( talk) 17:50, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
Anyone object to merging Pantglas Junior School into this article? I think most people know the name Aberfan, rather than the name of the school. Carcharoth 16:50, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
Why is this categorized as a corporate scandal? The NCB was a state institution at the time was it not? Or is there no such thing as "nationalised industry scandal" in the author's mind?
What was the justification for these deletions? I propose to revert soon unless somebody explains them. PatGallacher 12:00, 2005 May 25 (UTC)
The pupils of Pantglas Junior School had arrived only minutes earlier for the last day of term. They had just left the assembly hall, where they had been singing "All Things Bright and Beautiful", when a great noise was heard outside. Had they left for their classrooms a few minutes later, the loss of life would have been significantly reduced, as the classrooms were on the side of the building nearest the landslide.
This paragraph doesn't make sense. Shouldn't it be rewritten as it confuses readers on how many minutes and where the children where at the time. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.151.19.72 ( talk) 19:52, 14 May 2009 (UTC)
The page 'Aberfan' should be about the village while a page with a title such as 'Aberfan mining disaster' should be used for the disaster. This page has no information about the village history and the village today. Mtaylor848 ( talk) 14:40, 16 August 2009 (UTC)
(Outdent) As most of the page is on the disaster it is probably best, from an attribution point of view, to move this page so that the history remains intact. Though we would loose history on the redirect from the merge in 2004. The village article can then be started as a new article. Keith D ( talk) 23:22, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
The sooner the better, as far as I'm concerned. BTW it was 15,600 hits (I have a keyboard with a mind of its own - lame excuse for a typo I know, but it's the best I can do). I concur with the name being changed to simply "Aberfan Disaster". The date is unnecessary - it may imply that there were others (god forbid). Rambler24 ( talk) 09:26, 29 September 2009 (UTC)
Looks like clear consensus. Anyone gonna do it? Folks at 137 ( talk) 23:15, 23 November 2009 (UTC)
I've made a couple of mistakes in performing this requested move, my apologies for the dog's breakfast of an edit history that resulted; my understanding is that you all wanted the page to be at Aberfan disaster and that is where it now is, along with its associated talk page. Currently Aberfan redirects there, but this can certainly be changed to be a stub about the village if that's what's wanted. I noted that Jimbo himself requested that the talk page material formerly at Aberfan disaster be deleted, and I've done that, which made things a lot easier in getting this talk page into place. If there is anything that I have bollixed up by misunderstanding what was wanted, please accept my apologies; feel free to leave me a note and I'll be glad to fix it. Accounting4Taste: talk 01:50, 7 December 2009 (UTC)
My aim on Wikipedia is to preserve as much page history as possible. I found both the article and talk page of Aberfan disaster in the deleted edits of Conversion script. Without reading any of the discussion above, I decided to rectify this problem by moving the old history at Aberfan disaster to Talk:Aberfan disaster/Old history and moving the old talk page to Talk:Aberfan disaster/Archive 1. I don't believe that any talk page comments should be removed unless they're personal attacks, even at the request of the author, even if the author is Jimbo Wales. When Jimbo Wales wrote that comment in 2001, archiving of talk pages was almost unheard of, and things have changed a lot since then. He made a constructive comment which I think should be part of the historical record. Graham 87 18:17, 10 January 2010 (UTC)
{{ geodata-check}} The coordinates need the following fixes:
The correct coordinates for the Aberfan Disaster are as follows:
51°41'41.07"N 3°20'50.56"W
This can be verified on Google Earth, where these cordinates correspond to the disaster memorial site. 24.78.207.64 ( talk) 00:18, 26 January 2010 (UTC)
I don't see any reason for it to be there, or if it remains, it should be re-written. As it is, it seems like it endorses the idea that precognition exists. It should at least be re-written to say there were claims about precognition in connection with it, not "apparent predictions" which is a silly, and non-neutral term. And anyway, if they lived in a town overshadowed by a huge pile of rock, why wouldn't people tend to dream about it falling? Less precognition than common sense.
I think it makes the article and Wikipedia less credible for this even to be on the page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.2.218.145 ( talk) 04:38, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
I just deleted the precognition section. whok ( talk) 05:51, 16 April 2010 (UTC)
You mention "Aberfan: Under the Arc Lights," in The Spectator, October 10, 1966. If that date is correct, it was several days before the disaster, unrelated to it, and therefore suitable for the Wiki page on Aberfan as a village, not the disaster itself. 109.157.20.13 ( talk) 19:14, 15 December 2012 (UTC)
What? Is it a song, a book, or a chewing gum flavour? How about saying "uncle" instead of mother-brother? Do people even read what they type? Derekbd ( talk) 05:12, 16 May 2011 (UTC)
ツ Stacey ( talk) 15:43, 26 December 2015 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Aberfan disaster. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 17:15, 2 October 2016 (UTC)
Is it worthwhile/useful to start a new section specifically covering the activities around the 50th anniversary? Not only is there a number of documentaries/dramas, there are appraisals of the press and government roles, various concerts, a major new choral work, and also, perhaps most importantly, the narratives of survivors that have only recently be able to tell their stories.
There is a list of twelve ways the arts are commemorating the disaster here which has useful pointers to many of the TV programmes and also some exhibitions. Robevans123 ( talk) 12:24, 19 October 2016 (UTC)
The reports about the weight and volume of material that were involved contradict. 40,000 cubic metres of material, weighing around half a million tonnes... Hmm.. the density of Colliery shale is approximately 1.7 tonnes per cubic metre. This means, that if the volumes are correct, that the weight of the material to arrive in the village was 70,000 tonnes and not the 'half a million tonnes' quoted by the South Wales Police site. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jgb2 ( talk • contribs) 15:14, 9 January 2009 (UTC)
Dunks ( talk) 01:07, 10 January 2009 (UTC)
Where is the info about the studies on how they dealt with the disaster without murdering any of the perpetrators? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.234.123.137 ( talk) 08:06, 27 August 2011 (UTC)
What studies? The people around there dealt with their grief with the quiet dignity that was their normal response to mining disasters, however caused. If you can find any such studies by all means quote them. And sign your posts (add 4 x ~ at the end). Britmax ( talk) 08:24, 27 August 2011 (UTC)
It may be stating the blooming obvious but the Welsh people suffered the loss in a dignified silence. Reason - you get on with life and don't wear your heart on your sleeve. It is actually an old fashioned British thing - we suffer in silence, we grit our teeth and carry on and don't see the need to tell the world how we suffer. Coal miners and their families, and the communities they lived in looked after each other in both the good times and the bad, but especially in times of pain; and we did so behind closed doors. Apart from which what would a riot achieve? It could not or would not bring back one life and was, is and always will be pointless. Why smash up where we lived? There was no huggy-feely counselling, we got on with our shocked painful lives. The funerals followed the tragedy and that was when the public face of our grief was shown; our private grief continued in private and is still today borne with dignity. I was 16 when the disaster happened and have over the years had to deal with my own personal demons but I still feel the pain that day brought to my life. Anger that it happened but riot - it never even entered our heads! It would have been disrespectful to those who died and those who grieved had such a thing as "Self respect." The Geologist ( talk) 13:58, 20 March 2015 (UTC)
I have to disagree about the dignified silence stuff actually, 116 children & 28 adults died in a horrible way and those responsible should have faced a much higher punishment than they did. There was knowledge beforehand about the instability of the location and yet they went ahead with it. There was ongoing knowledge while the coal installation was present and no safety precautions or actions were taken. Not one person was jailed. I know it's pointless going on about it, and I know this isn't the place for such discussion, but I just felt like adding my opinion anyway, sorry. -- AF1990 ( talk) 03:15, 12 October 2016 (UTC)
I am doubtful abut the phrase: "[...] were deposited on the side of Mynydd Merthyr, an overhanging ridge, directly above the village of Aberfan.". This can be read as meaning an Overhang (rock formation), but this type of formation is not typical of the area. The picture shown above ( File:Aberfan and old coal tips - geograph.org.uk - 673825.jpg) shows the lie of the land. It is possible that an overhang was covered up by the slip, but I think overhanging ridge just means a ridge directly above the village. It is ambiguous, so I will delete "overhanging". Verbcatcher ( talk) 03:14, 23 October 2016 (UTC)
I recall reading that in newspaper microfilm, and this added to rumors that the Beatles were splitting up. You may notice this comes not long after the Beatles had stopped touring. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.63.16.82 ( talk) 14:21, 3 April 2012 (UTC)
If I go on further about this regarding the Beatles, I'll be off-topic regarding the Aberfan disaster. There is a Wikipedia entry about the Beatles in 1966, so I will copy the above remark (about declining to do Aberfan benefit) to talk page there. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.63.16.82 ( talk) 16:12, 5 April 2012 (UTC)
From Hunter Davies' biography of The Beatles (1978 edition), p. 362, quoting Ringo: "Most of the people running charities are not nice people. What good did the Aberfan Fund do, except for all the lawyers ? They gave each person £5,000 for losing a child. Ridiculous. Five million quid doesn't equal losing a child." The Beatles had given what was to be their last public concert in San Francisco in late August 1966, after a particularly gruelling tour of the Philippines, Japan and the US, so i'm guessing thye were not really up for going back on stage then. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.7.179.191 ( talk) 21:27, 23 October 2016 (UTC)
Detail of entry seems about right. Maybe trim it a bit when there's an article on it. Along with Sinfonia Cymru and David Childs. All on the todo list, but I may wait until the CD has been reviewed a bit more and USA premier has happened. Robevans123 ( talk) 22:48, 23 October 2016 (UTC)
The introduction states that "Rescue efforts were hampered by the large crowd who rushed into the village delaying the arrival of mines rescue workers from Merthyr Vale Colliery."
I have problems with the tone and meaning of this and I don't think it is really supported by any statements in the article. Some background:
Some thoughts arise:
See also the later section in the article on "Rescue efforts". Only the last sentence of the opening para is supported by a reference. The reference only supports some of the other statements. I am loath to put citation needed templates all over this article a day before it'll be read before many people, but I believe that at least the sentence under question in the introduction should be removed until/if it is supported by referenced text in the article. Robevans123 ( talk) 15:26, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
The phrase "if it had struck a few hours later, the school would have broken up for half-term." is very confusing to non-British readers (or maybe just to American readers like myself). Having had some exposure to British culture, I understand that the school "breaking up" means that the students and teachers left for a break from school, but to an average American reader this could easily be misinterpreted as the school building being physically broken (I.e. because of the disaster), which seems unrelated to the rest of the sentence.
I would edit it myself, but I'm not sure what half-term is, other than some break from school, and I don't know if the definition is relevant to the article. And I certainly don't want to diminish communication that the current wording provides to British readers that I'm sure I've missed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mghoffmann ( talk • contribs) 07:51, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Is there any reliable source for the joint funeral on 27 October being "attended by more than 2,000 people"? There are plenty of instances online, but most see to Wikipedia mirror sites or recent news articles which have probably used this article as their source. This contemporary source gives the fugure of mourners, as 12,000. This seems to be a rather large figure. Martinevans123 ( talk) 21:17, 23 October 2016 (UTC)
I was thinking about this earlier. The 2,000+ figure is everywhere, but they all look like mirror sites. There's a figure of 3,000 from the Merthyr Express - it's somewhere on the Nuffield Aberfan disaster site (but it doesn't give an issue date or number). I saw the itnsource - way too big I think, but it's pretty difficult to estimate crowds on hillsides, but from the footage I've seen 2,000 - 3,000 seems about right. I've seen a reference to 5,000 at http://www.uwp.co.uk/news/2016/10/aberfan, but the University of Wales Press website seems a bit slow at the moment & is timing out. I think it's from part of a book on the challenges of faith or something along those lines. Which remains me, we should have some information somewhere on the pastoral support given to the rescuers and bereaved. Some of the church ministers did amazing work (one of them carried on even though two of his children were dead), and the Salvation Army and Red Cross pitched in. I've read that the Sally Army provided 6 bottles of whisky or brandy every day to the Police and other staff working at Bethania. It was to add to hot drinks to keep them feeling warm rather than to numb the effects of their work.
The figure of 5,000 also crops up a few times in quotes from the Bishop of Llandaff, but it becomes clear that it's the current bishop's childhood memories, and I suspect he's read tho book mentioned above.
This British Pathe newsreel of the mass funeral mentions 10,000, which again seems rather high.
I think it's time for Martinevans123 to go to Newport library and check the South Wales Argus microfiches!
Images seem a bit scarce. I've added a reqphoto at Talk:Alfred Robens, Baron Robens of Woldingham. Martinevans123 ( talk) 22:07, 25 October 2016 (UTC) p.s. the final choice for his 1965 appearance on Desert Island Discs was " Climb Ev'ry Mountain".
I recently noticed some stills from ITV news film being used here in some material produced by the NLW. The stills are watermarked with a symbol, I think representing the National Screen and Sound Archive of Wales (www.archif.com). Although the document, apart from its title "ITV Stills", contains no mention of copyright, the NLW seems to have arrangements with BBC/ITV etc to digitise TV material concerning Wales. But it did get me thinking. Would we be allowed to use a handful of video stills from documentary/news footage from the time of the disaster under "fair use"?
Also found this cartoon of Robens, which may be a useful external link in the tribunal page. Robevans123 ( talk) 15:50, 30 October 2016 (UTC)
I suggest moving some of the detail from the Davies Inquiry section into a new article on the Aberfan Tribunal. We could expand the new article to cover its place in the history of similar enquiries, and give a list of the participants, several of whom later became prominent including: [1]
I don't want to expand this article to cover this as it would be overweight, and might be taken to suggest an equivalence between these distinguished lawyers and the sufferings of the bereaved and the heroism of the rescue attempts. Verbcatcher ( talk) 16:48, 24 October 2016 (UTC)
References
I am preparing a draft for Aberfan Disaster Tribunal. I'll put a link here when it's ready for review. Verbcatcher ( talk) 21:03, 28 October 2016 (UTC)
I am unhappy with the section title Consequences for NCB, staff, board and chairman. The first comma indicates that the section covers the consequences to the NCB as a corporate body as well as to its people. "Board" is tautologous because NCB is "National Coal Board". I suggest Consequences for NCB staff, board members and chairman or Consequences for NCB: staff, board members and chairman. Verbcatcher ( talk) 19:13, 30 October 2016 (UTC)
Please see Talk:Aberfan Disaster Tribunal#Sources for expanding the article. Some of this also applies here. Verbcatcher ( talk) 01:05, 31 October 2016 (UTC)